8: The Mormon Proposition

(Photo Courtesy: sacbee.com)

In my time, I have seen many different types of social documentaries that have made me feel a whirlwind of emotions from concern to angst to anger. Never, have I felt such intense emotions about such a personal and controversial subject as the one covered in "8: The Mormon Proposition". This film documents, in detail, the campaign to ban same-sex marriage via State Constitutional amendment in the state of California during the 2008 Election season. At the time this proposition went to the ballet, same-sex marriage was recently legalized by the Supreme Court of California and thousands of marriages were performed across the state and many more planned to take place with friends and family; as marriage should be celebrated. This proposition ended all of those hopes and dreams of couples who were ready to make that next step in creating a family built on love and honor and commitment.

A member of the Coalition created to fund campaigns against same-sex marriage, who was anonymous, brought documentation to the attention of a legal expert which outlines all of the battle plans the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints had formed in order to defeat same-sex marriage legislation in Hawaii. There, they formed a coalition of religious followers and churches, which behind they stood as funders and unattached supporters, to fight against the State of Hawaii Legislation. They used educational ads which made voters feel that it was their right to stand strong and not allow a government to take away their right to belief in God, Church, Sin, and that homosexuality was an abomination. They funded the majority of the campaign, and some within the coalition say, the ban would have failed without the support of the LDS Church. These battle plans were carried over into California and set in place years before Prop 8 was on the ballot.

In the same fashion that they formed a battle plan with Hawaii, the LDS Church moved into position to lead the pack. Without officially forming a Political Action Committee, the LDS funded and assigned members from within their Church to form the group known as the National Organization of Marriage. By distancing themselves completely from the campaign, the Mormons were free to fund and build a strong opposition and "coalition" to pass the Constitutional ban.

To understand just HOW the LDS Church went about getting all the money to fund Prop 8, we learned just HOW the LDS Church operates in their belief system. The first teaching within the Church is that of Obedience. They believe that the 12 Prophets of the Church have direct contact with God and their word is the same word of their God. They also believe that when they die, their spirit goes to the spirit world. In the spirit world, they become a God and get their own world for which they must create little spirit babies with all the spirit women so that they can create life on their own planet. Its a reward for following "God's plan" and doing what they were put here to do. This is one of the founding ideas behind their original polygamist practice. The more babies they create, the happier and better off they were in following the path created for them. To me, I respect religion and allowing people to believe what suits them best. But the reason the Church was so impartial and "hell-bent" (no pun intended) on stopping same-sex marriage is because they interfere their what they believe is God's plan. It's a very intense set of beliefs, but nonetheless, they are allowed to practice it as such.

In the campaign, the Church used smear ads saying that legalizing gay marriage would do so many different things to upset the balance of life and child education, that the uneducated voters would eventually listen and follow suit. Sickening, but that's what their religion lead them to do. In order to fund the 72% of all the money spent on Prop 8 by the LDS Church (an estimated total $83 million spent on the campaign, you do the math) came because of the tactics used by the Prophets and their Elders. The Prophets delivered a 1 hour speech and following letter to its members, with personal bank statement/income/savings information telling them how much money the Church feels they can donate to the campaign. Elders from the Church would visit each family in the coming days/weeks with blank checks, reiterate how much money they think each family can donate, and then wait for them to write the check. I found it compelling that, regardless of class, income, or family size, a Church organization would actually know the personal financial information of a family and then make assumption about how much they can "do without". Again, the word of the Prophet is the word of their God, so the families were obedient and gave as directed.

They also gave us a glimpse into the lives of what a gay Mormon would go through. The main story followed the lives of two gay Mormon men who got married the day the Supreme Court ruled same-sex marriage legal. They were shut out from their families, with the exception of one of the mothers, and excommunicated by choice from the Church. They were happy the day they got married, and felt as if the world was finally becoming accepting and changing for the better. Then, the campaign started and it felt like their world was falling apart. We see how many gay Mormons become homeless, and commit suicide. Salt Lake City has the highest teenage suicide rate, with 80% of those being or thought to be known for committing homosexual acts. Families within the Church who's children committed suicide even stated on record that they were happy once they knew their children weren't around anymore. Happy their child committed suicide. . . That's where the tears began to roll down the sides of my face. I can't imagine a life growing up where the feelings of complete emptiness would consume me to drive me towards taking my own life. It's very sad that this does happen and because of the power of the Church, often goes under the radar. I can't type about this subject anymore.

Proposition 8, the Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in the state of California, my home state, passed by a margin of 4%. 52% to 48%. 504,479 single votes made it possible for what was seen as the most liberal state at the time, after millions and millions of OUT OF STATE dollars came in to support banning same-sex marriage, to TAKE AWAY the rights of so many thousands of loving couples. This historical documentary really gives you some serious insight as to how this tragic vote was made possible, and comes to DVD on July 13th. It is worth the watch and will definitely serve as a stepping stone towards achieving equality for LGBT families. One of the many concepts we discussed in IDS 101 this quarter.

Oh FOX, you're so FOXY!

Geez. I can't remember the last time someone asked me if I watch FOX. I mean, sure, there are quite a few good things to come out of the FOX/Newscorp Network, like Kelly Clarkson, but on a serious note, what is this world coming to?
Newscorp, the mastermind company that owns everything FOX and FOX-named, founded and ran (as Chairman and CEO) by Rupert Murdock, claims many things about their broadcast network. Their main slogan for their News Channel, "Fair and Balanced", is just a crock of junk propaganda used to lure in viewers who think they are actually getting the right information, all the information, and watching good TV.

It's fair and balanced to say, FOX Network is just so Foxy!

To use a fair and balanced example of how FOX uses its super-fantastic editing skills, I will show you two clips of Lady Gaga's performance on "American Idol", of her smash hit "Alejandro".

This is the version of the performance we got to see on "LIVE" TV. It wasn't live, it was prerecorded. When I watched the show, because Im a little monster die-hard huge fan of Lady Gaga, I was already questioning what just happened. The chorus in her song, "Don't call my name, don't call my name, Alejandro. I'm not your babe, I'm not your babe, Fernando. Don't wanna kiss, don't wanna touch, just smoke my cigarette and hush. Don't call my name, Don't call my name, Roberto..." (Alejandro, lyrics by Lady Gaga), didnt seem to fall into place at around 3:15 into the clip. While I'm singing along at home to her dance routine and chorus, I slipped up on the lyrics that I thought I had mastered after playing her album "The Fame Monster" nonstop for the past few months. Then it happened again shortly after that part of the song!! I couldn't figure it out, and was getting a bit confused.

Since I DVR'd the show, I rewound the clip to see if maybe I was just blanking out and hallucinating the scene, but nope, there it was again. Out of my confusion, I immediately jump on my computer and went straight to Twitter (twitter.com) to find out if I was alone in my world. I do not have a twitter account, but I do frequent Lady Gaga's twitter page to see what she's up to, and sure enough, she posted something which quickly fired me into an uproar:

" http://bit.ly/apyBrH FOX POORLY + AMATEURLY edited+cut my performance/musical arrangement on idol. Watch real version. http://bit.ly/apyBrH 11:36 AM May 6th via OpenBeak

http://bit.ly/apyBrH here's my full american idol performance ALEJANDRO. Fox chopped up my performance in 4 places. Real version on itunes. " (twitter.com/ladygaga)

I was livid! I knew something was fishy about the broadcast performance on "American Idol", but I couldn't believe there was more to the story than just a horrible editing job. When I clicked the link she posted to check out the REAL performance, I noticed that you can actually SEE the dance routine! It was the first time in "American Idol" history that there was an all-male dance group dancing together. Like, together together! They dip each other, spin each other, rub each other, etc...in a very tasteful manner. Lady Gaga is a professional and she knows her boundaries for how and what she can do, especially on a "family" show. In the FOX edit, you see many close up shots of her and her upperbody. You get a little less than 2 minutes of the actual performance that FOX pre-recorded. You don't get the magnitude of dance moves, shake and shimmy, and over all Gaganess of the performance. I'll give it to you, though, because it's sheer genius:



The fact that it was edited so much was because of the backlash FOX would face if the homosexual dance content was shown on air. Do we even know if the men in the background were gay? No. Do we even know if they have gay sex together? No. Does it LOOK like they are gays and going to have gay sex with each other? Heck no! They were performing art, dance, and did it in a very tasteful manner! FOX responded to the left by saying they had to cut down the performance to less than 5 minutes due to time constraints, but never mentioned anything about the fact that they took the male dancers out of focus during their couple's routine.

Focusing on another show FOX airs, "Glee", Im just gonna take a jump into something that also shows how homosexuals are depicted. We all know the stereotype that homosexuals don't have a strong relationship with their same-sex parent, which causes them to become gay. Case in point, we have Kurt Hummel, the token gay guy on the show. Throughout the series, for those who have yet to see it, he is the flamboyant and extremely effeminate boy who wears bright colors, fantasizes about the lead male character (who is straight, but that doesn't stop the gay guy from crushing on him), has a high pitched voice, has a thin body, uninterested in sports, and has an image of being weak. This is his character, this is a stereotypical gay guy in high school. Is this really what they're like?

I like to tell myself that I transcend boundaries and stereotypes for my cultural identity. I'm a strong-willed male who is very opinionated and aggressive in behavior. I wear dark colors, or rather not so pastelly, bulky, strong, and deep voiced. That's not me on the TV screen, and that certainly wasn't me in high school. Where are the real gays?! Are they too busy hiding in fear because of their lackluster relationships with their same-sex parent? To make my point, I would like to show an additional two clips of Kurt on "Glee". The first one is the typical Kurt, what he always looks like and how he sings. The second, is his response to his father shunning him to hang out and be a father-figure for said male lead, who is without a father. Kurt goes from flamboyant tinkerbell to roughneck, macho, John Mellencamp singing, wanna-be heterosexual wearing a trucker hat and bubble jacket vest who is in need of his father.





It just sends a message to the LGBTQ youth communities that, while it's okay to be gay, you have to play this particular role. Roles tell us a lot about our culture, and when you have a media conglomerate as large as FOX setting roles, stereotypes, and making it seem like the same-sex parent myth is true, future generations start to believe those messages.

Editing music acts and changing the way a character is portrayed to fit what media big wigs want? I fail to see how that is fair and balanced. I know, that slogan is for the news channel, but I really don't want to get started there.

I could go on and on, but I think these two very solid pieces of evidence are a good start for you readers out there to begin your very own research and develop a sense of what's right and what's wrong in the media.



All clips are courtesy of Youtube.com and are searchable.

Racism and the American Prison System...in media!

(Photo Courtesy of www.policemag.com)

I was watching one of my favorite shows, Police Women of Maricopa County, and they had a special episode following the jobs of their female Detention Officers in their jail houses. In this show, there was an issue going on within the inmate community between the hispanic and black races. Apparently, there were written by-laws within each group that all the inmates have to follow in order to have the protection of their own race. If you are white, you were called a "Wood", and hand written papers were passed off to you as you walked in the General Population Pod. Some of these rules included things from what time you need to work out, when to wash your hands, and which TV to go watch during recreation time. If you are hispanic, you were not allowed to bunk with black inmates because of this secret race war that was going on. If you were black and a hispanic was assigned to bunk with you, you would be considered a "Wood" if you didn't break a rule (which added jail time to your sentence) in order to be switched to a different cell. These types of rules between the races, self-segregation, is an extreme form of active racism. Not only are the races governing themselves within the jailhouse, but they are forcing their own members to commit crimes to get their way. That's like, using the system against itself.

It's a hard issue to investigate, as Officers are pitted against inmates to try and get as much information as they can. This proves to be near impossible as all the inmate featured in the episode refuse to cooperate with the Officers and even risk their own freedom to deny knowledge or participation in gang actions. Eventually, as with all groups, there is always that person who's will isn't as strong as the others, and cracks under pressure. However, and at least in this episode, that was not the case.

A Mexican male was housed with an African American male and, acting as a group, broke the toilet in their cell so that the Detention Officers had to remove them and rehouse them in different cells. To test the theory that there was a secret race war, Officer Molina, an Italian female, moved them both into cells that had members of the opposite race. Reluctantly, the African American inmate walked into the cell, showing through body language that he was visibly upset about housing with a "paisa". However, the Mexican male refused to enter the cell with another African American inmate, saying "I can't go in that cell, Molina." As refusing to house is against the statutes of the County Jail, the inmate was detained in the disciplinary level for questioning and 30 days of solitary confinement. During the interview, he said "I can't house with no black", and that was the most revealing information he would offer up to the Officers.

The other inmate that was moved got into a fight with his new cellmate, proving Officer Molina's theory, so he was sent to solitary and then was also placed in the disciplinary level.

Gang wars are a major issue in the American Prison system. This is apparent in Hollywood cinema through a large number of the movies where Prison life is the focus. To give an example, I will also take a look at Blood In, Blood Out: Bound By Honor. This movie starts in 1972 in East Los Angeles. If follows the lives of cousins Miklo, Cruz, and Paco, who all start out at the same place and neighborhood, and then follow 3 very different paths. The movie, in my honest opinion, is the Mexican version of Boyz N The Hood. It follows very distinct stereotypes which plague the Mexican American community and places then in very hostile environments.


(Photo Courtesy of Hollywood Pictures)

Miklo is a mixed race, light skinned teen who runs away to live with his mother after getting into a fight with his father. The mother, as typical in Chicano culture, is seen throughout the movie wearing pretty dresses, make up, and jewelry and seems very submissive in her demeanor. In this case, she says she is relying on her ex's check to survive, making it appear that she cannot support herself.

Paco is the typical "tough guy", cholo type who is hard nosed and self-loathing. He is "el gallo negro" or the black rooster in his boxing world, and is the half-brother of Miklo. He calls Miklo names such as "milk-weed" "white boy" "guero" and "milk chocolate". He is as tough as nails and as sharp as one too. He also shows little respect for his parents and only acknowledges them once they snap at him to get his attention.

Cruz is an artist, who has a love for cars. His passion is to paint, and he is very good at it. He loves his car, typical in Chicano culture, and spends a lot of time cleaning it. He is so talented, he wins a scholarship in high school for his art work. It is interesting to note that a White, blond male presents him his award and scholarship, though is probably of little meaning. During his celebration, you see the cholos smoking weed, drinking tequila, wearing bandannas, and the girls full of make up. During a would-be love scene, Cruz is beat, given a broken back, and stabbed by a rival gang, but saved from death by a resident of the barrio. He later returns to painting and then has a showing to sell his artwork. His white business manager bars his "carnals" from going into the party because "we don't want to lose sales because of 'those' people".


(Photo Courtesy of Hollywood Pictures)

Miklo, being light-skinned, is out to prove himself to the other "Vato Locos" in his barrio. He is always teased and taunted for being light-skinned, so it's no surprise that he will go lengths to get acknowledged. He goes as far as to commit murder with his homies in revenge for the attack on Cruz. He is the only one caught and is shipped off to Prison. While in Prison, he joins the Mexican gang "La Onda", which means "The People". Gang politics inside the pen erupts, as race is pitted against race in the ensuing race wars. There are many murders and heinous acts committed by and against "The Aryan Vanguard" and the "Black Gorilla Army", with Miklo becoming one of La Onda's leaders. Homosexuality is seen throughout the Prison period, as men using sex to gain power and authority over the weaker inmates. Miklo, being an attractive, light-skinned Mexican boy with blue eyes, uses his sexuality to lure in one of the Aryan Brothers in an assassination move. This move was required of him to join "La Onda", as their moniker is blood in, blood out. I think it's played out as being very homoerotic for such a masculine film, but keeps some truth to the situation and issue of the Prison system. It also depicts many of the cross-dressing men that are in the Prison system, showing that a) they do exist and b) they are just as powerful as the other race gangs.


(Photo Courtesy of Hollywood Pictures)

Once out on parole, Miklo continues the criminal activity, and during an Armored Truck robbery, he faced with a member of his family. Paco, during all the years, joined the Marine Corps and became a Police Officer with the LAPD. He faced off with Miklo when his unit foiled the robbery plan, and shoots Miklo's leg off. It's an emotional moment for the characters and the viewers and you see brother versus brother, decision versus decision, in which the law wins. Miklo goes back to jail, secretly assassinates La Onda's leader, and becomes the new "Jefe".

Cruz becomes addicted to heroin and, due to his addition, foolishly leaves out his drugs where his younger brother dies from an accidental overdose. Cruzito blames himself for the death of his hermanito for the rest of his days, never making it out of the barrio.

In the end scene, Cruz and Paco remember the old days and where they have gone in life, both taking blame for the life Miklo ended up living, but happy they are still alive.

Homo-Themes. They like themselves!

Gay Hollywood, or is it, Hollywood is gay?

Well, through my years of being a strong minded and opinionated person, I have always noticed that Hollywood doesn't seem to make movies about everyday gay life. I'm offended!! Where's the hot Brad Pitt/Tom Cruise make-out scenes from the sexually-charged Interview with the Vampire?? Every other Vampire movies have always had some sort of sex appeal to them, but it's always (in Hollywood's record) heterosexual sex. Where are all the gays?! My concern isn't for the rich conservative people who only want their children to watch heterosexual content; they already have their minds and lives made up for themselves. My concern is for the next generation of kids who are homosexual that do not have any role models or celebrity to look up to. Even the movies that do have homosexual characters in them have some sort of eerie theme or tragedy that occur, such as death. Why?

I decided to start a blog about gay themes in movies, which don't necessarily aim to make a character gay shine, or directly have a gay character, and demonstrate many of the stereotypes society has about the gay community. I have always seen popular Hollywood movies and seen many of their characters as feminine or masculine. This could be just because of how I'm wired internally, or just my own way of finding similarities with myself in the characters on screen, but isn't that what pop culture is about?

...

...

As a child/teenager, there were very few role models which I felt had the characteristics I wanted to model myself after. While little Tommy next door grew up with G.I. Joe and Rambo, I was busy looking for a smart, sophisticated, clean-cut, All-American, gay man who was successful and a natural leader. That was me and that was what I wanted to see. Doesn't seem like a lot to a 10 year old at the time, but apparently I was mistaken. The choices I was limited to were Nathan Lane's ultra-flamboyant, cross-dressing character from The Birdcage, a gay man with AIDS who eventually dies such as in Philadelphia, a transgendered man who is raped and murdered like in Boys don't Cry, better yet, The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert and To Wong Foo, which star talented drag queens who go through many different adventures and conquest. Thank God for Ellen Degeneres and her star power in her TV Show, The Ellen Degeneres Show, or I wouldn't have much to hope for.

After many years, I realized none of the characters portrayed as homosexual in Hollywood were anything like me, and it made me venture out into the world of independent and foreign films. Today, I find myself only enjoying Independent films featuring gay and lesbian content as opposed to the ones created by major studios. The realness of the depictions is far more on point to what a real gay person is like when compared to those in Hollywood films. I will take a look into what I mean specifically by looking at a little old movie called "The Birdcage". It is not really a "BIG HOLLYWOOD" movie, but it was the first one I saw in theaters that had a gay character.

The movie, staring Robin Williams and Nathan Lane, was hilarious! It simply was the greatest movie at that time I had I ever seen!! I fell in love with the performance played by Nathan Lane as the obvious "wife" to Robin Williams! I did, because it was sheer comedy. However, I have never seen such a feminine gay man in my real life, and being a gay man, I have seen many! My partner, NJ, is the obvious yang to my yin, and has a flamboyant appeal, yet he doesn't act in such an extreme manner. I remember watching this movie in the theater with my mother at the age of 12, without exactly knowing what we were watching. My mother wasn't very comfortable with homosexuality at that time, so when she realized what the movie was about, she began to cringe at the sight of Nathan Lane; especially in the scenes he is dressed in drag. To me, this was no bother, in fact I laughed through the entire movie. Other people in the cinema, granted the year was 1996, did not seem to join me in my loud cackling. No matter, I didn't mind a "Reyes, party of one", moment.



There is a scene in the movie where Williams and Lane are sitting on a bench, in their normal posture, which will stick in my head forever. Williams, the masculine side of the relationship, is sitting as I would be comfortable. Lane, however, is sitting as my mother would sit. To me, this was a cute sentiment of a modern gay couple, but the jeers in the audience was enough to tell me this is not a way to be. Now, I didn't care, but I would have loved to have seen more of this in movies, and in media in general. Unfortunately, I did frown upon the scene where Williams is teetering on the straight/gay boundary line with his former lover played by Christine Baranski. Were the studio producers not satisfied with the lack of heterosexual content from the masculine character Armand? Really? I mean...Really?

In the next few blog posts, I will attempt to look into these things, which have plagued my good cinemas and kept the gay youth of America from finding role models in media just like the other kids on the playground. It's what's fair and right! Kids don't have the ability to find and watch Independent films unless they go through great lengths to find them. Why can't gay cinema play on the big screen? It would help more people become familiar and accepting of the subject.

As I wrap up this entry, think about the gay movies you have seen, that involve a non-stereotypical theme and the characters do not die or become depressed!! Any insight would be wonderfully fantastic!!


-Reyes